cones or amp stand-???

"It appears the article was written with the express intent of promoting certain products which kept getting mentioned over and over again."

Tell me you get irony of this one.

"Where I seem to have difficulty agreeing with him, are the parts where he seems to be convinced that vibrations can be transmitted up from the floor, but cannot be transmitted down from the equipment "like a hose"(as he puts it)."

This was not the point as I read it. Dickson relates vibration transmitting in both directions. The operative phrase in the "like a hose" sentence is "containing a one-way check valve".

I was not going to write this paragraph, but now there are three posts amounting to the same point. My stance is: (A) what is odd/funny to me are users who believe their consumer experience necessarily gains them knowledge of an accurate physical explanation. (B) I did not post about a thing but a "theory". (C) I didn't start it; the door was soooo wide open for my post.

Celine: "The diode effect does work..."

Twl from the thread I can not believe hasn't been deleted:

"The points do not function as a "one way" device or 'mechanical diode'."

PS - Twl, what happened to parts two and three of the white paper trilogy Star Sound was going to create?

Like always, Pleasure Boy(aka Ohlala), you're just performing your usual mental masturbation trying to see how many you can get to chase their tail around the mulberry bush.

This would be an excellent time for everybody to take a break and allow Pleasure Boy to share his real world experiences and end-results on this topic.

Surely you have some thoughts and experiences of your own, don't you?

Instead of demanding documents and manipulating others to spend lots of time defending a position that you obviously know nothing about nor care to, Pleasure Boy, why don't you contribute something worth while yourself for a change of pace?

That is aside from your 'time to masturbate' post in another thread, which is certainly nothing to be proud of unless you're 12.

-IMO

Ohlala, my comment was just pointing out that a certain magazine that you apparently regard as having valid articles can be just as prone to promote certain products as company reps can be. In fact,it is quite apparent that your position has for a long time, been one of general "anti-Starsound" sentiment, yet you attempt to masquerade as a general member, and try to use your forum as an negative influencing factor on other readers. At least we make ourselves publically known on this forum as reps. You are the one with the apparent "ulterior motives". Now that we realize that it(promoting or detracting) is done by alot of people with various motives(divested, or not), can we move on?

Regarding the "one way check valve" issue about "cones", as you pointed out later in your post, this is not how Audiopoints work, and I've stated as such(more than once, and thank you for pointing that out). I can't help that this inaccurate terminology is prevalent in the public domain regarding "cones" in general, or even in relation to our products. You can probably thank your magazine writers for that. We have always stated that the flow direction is determined by the laws of physics, and not our technology. Our technology simply provides an efficient pathway for the energy to flow(and not be seriously impeded, or horribly reflected, or stored)away from the components, and toward the high mass ground state of the earth, where it is damped. If you have a problem with this, then you are welcome to discuss it with whichever scientist discovered the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. Energy will seek the ground state via the path of least resistance. If the path to ground is not the least resistant one available, then it it will propagate thru the other least resistant paths, where it will continue to exist until exhausted via gradual dissipation thru heat. If the vibrational energy path of least resistance is provided via reduction in Coulomb Friction at the junctures, and proper materials and geometries are employed, so that the vibrational energies can move toward earth ground, they will do so. A "lesser" cone(or other support), which does not utilize these properties, will not provide this "path of least resistance" as well as Audiopoints, and thus will not perform the intended task as well(if at all).

"Your stance, (A)" is a very interesting point. Perhaps it applies to you?

Regarding the follow-ups to our published White Papers for Audiogon readers, we will post them on our timetable. Right now, we have our hands full with trying to fill the strong demand for our Harmonic Precision Caravelle speakers. Considering that there are less than 5 Audiogon members(including yourself) that we know of which seem to be disputing our technology, this makes it a fairly low priority for us at this time.

It seems that the reviewers and public are finding out that our technology works so well, that it has spawned a new performance leader in the monitor speaker world. While this is very exciting for us, it is simply another case where our technology has provided a pinnacle product in its respective arena, just like our Audiopoints and Sistrum Platforms have done. Our Caravelle Monitors are an example of how we could take normal "off the shelf" quality European drivers, and make them into a loudspeaker that is gaining world acclaim. Why couldn't others make these speakers from these drivers?. Because it is the Starsound technology of vibration management that makes them work the way they do. That is the difference.

So there you have it. 3 product lines using the similar technology, all highly acclaimed by users and reviewers alike. Coincidence? I don't think so. A few vocal "nay-sayers" don't change the facts.

Have a nice day.

Tom Lyons
Starsound Technologies

I wanted to post this, but do not have the time to read Twl's post and to address Stehno's issues ( I will later). In my last post I was not looking for a debate with Twl's points (I liked his post), I just wanted to address comprehension of the article.

Hi Twl, I already understood your point about the mag's motivation. No blame, but it would be great if you understood my post.

"You are the one with the apparent "ulterior motives"."
"At least we make ourselves publically known on this forum as reps."

One could get more base and realize every action requires motivation, but the quality of the motives is what is really pertinent. There is major difference between Star Sound's and my circumstances in which we post, profit v. personal experiences. That is why you put the rep tag with your posts. If I was to use a disclaimer, everyone should ala slippery slope. I am not copping to an ulterior motive, but I realize none of you buy that. The problem, I think, is that my experience was bad. No one would care if with equal force, I posted good experiences. But yes, let’s move on.

Regarding your second paragraph, I already read it in your past posts. I got it regarding the valve farce but not to be self-centered now maybe more will. Its just there's no longer that disagreement between you and Dickson. I appreciate the response; it was nice to see an attempt to sort of correlate that article, which I have used to draw my conclusion, with your position.

""Your stance, (A)" is a very interesting point. Perhaps it applies to you?"

It’s not interesting. I get what you’re saying - no.

"Considering that there are less than 5 Audiogon members..."

Good company.